About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
of it followed bill clinton's 1993 tax increase. now, mitt romney has just spent two years telling us that tax cuts are all you need to stimulate the economy. is that wrong? >> absolutely wrong. supply side economics is bunk. we have seen historically not only when bill clinton raised taxes the economy did very well. george w. bush in 2001, 2003, cut taxes and the economy did very badly and then ultimately went really over a cliff in 2008. or more evidence for the first three decades after the second world war in the united states, the top tax rate never fell below 70% under dwight d. eisenhower, president eisenhower -- >> and yet professor, we have heard paul ryan, the so-called budget policy wonk of the house, repeatedly tell us that what we need to do is cut taxes and the economy does great. >> well, that's just simply not true. we had an election. most of the americans obviously did not believe that nonsense, and it is absolutely nonsense. there's no correlation at all between tax rates on the very top and the economy doing worse or for that matter doing much better. but here we have a hug
's suggestion he might not demand the top income tax rate return to what it was under bill clinton. aides with him for the second tour of damage from hurricane sandy suggested mr. obama's demand is for a sure source of re-knew, leaving negotiators to decide how much the re-knew is. >> what i will not do is to have a process that is vague, that says we're going to sort of, kind of raise revenue through dynamic scoring. or closing loopholes that have not been identified. >> on this day, house speaker john boehner claimed that gallup survey showed most people support lowering the deficit ending the tax loopholes and making needed spending cuts. but that is not specific enough for white house. boehner wasn't more detailed the day before. >> getting in to the specifics of that at this point would not be con deuce i to try to come to the white house. >> republicans and democrats continue to position themselves for friday startup talks between the president and congressional leaders. each accusing the other of refusing to compromise. >> the keys to the car are heading toward the fisca cliff are
and working hard for -- and playing by the rules as bill clinton liked to say, if you can't speak to both of those, you're not going to be able to be a winner or have a governing majority that is stable in this country. it's not possible. >> howard, the great swing voters, reagan democrats, more conservative, many catholics, but just middle of the road people, i'm not sure they're all capitalists and tie coopycoonst. they're general pie peoplely people that go to work and come off the shift. >> there's two levels. one is that not everybody cares about entrepreneurialism and the abstract theories of joseph, et cetera. and the other part of it is cultural. people want to be left alone to live their lives in relative security with values that they appreciate. and mitt romney, who thought the whole campaign was just about the unemployment rate even failed at that because he didn't connect up the entrepreneurial spirit with how it might help the lives of those work a day people. that's something ron 23458d nald reagan and jack kemp at least figured out how to sell a generation ago. >> i guess
. >> in 1997 after bill clinton got re-elected but before lewinsky, the republicans tried to do the same thing on chinese fund-raising. remember that? they spent the better part of a year trying to turn this into a huge scandal. there is a little more to that one than there is to this. this is just exploiting a tragedy for political purposes. >> and here is the great irony. john mccain, who seems like he's the big whistle-blower, going after susan rice yesterday. compare what he said about susan rice yesterday with what he said about another foreign policy expert, in this case condoleezza rice, back in 2005. here is mccain on susan rice. take a listen. >> susan rice should have known better, and if she didn't know better, she's not qualified. she should have known better. i will do everything in my power to block her from being the united states secretary of state. >> okay. mortal sin, deal breaker, end of her career because john mccain said she had gotten the wrong brief and delivered the wrong brief. however, mccain had a very different reaction back in 2005 when condoleezza rice was nominat
cliff. martha: doug schoen, former pollster to president bill clinton. monica crowley, radio talk show host. both are fox news contributors and what i'm hearing through both of those quotes we're pretty much where we were the last time that the president and john boehner got together. that republicans are going to refuse to go along with any tax increases until, really because they want to see it done slightly different way which we can get into. the president says, that he won't budge either, monica. >> yes. what goes around and comes around and here we are exactly the same spot, martha, as you just said. there are two sacred principle at play for the republicans not raising taxes and cutting spending. focus seems to be because president and democrats do have control over this narrative only thing that seems to be at the conversation here, what we're talking about is, the tax issue, revenue versus rates. but i also think that the republicans really need to focus on cutting spending. that is the other part of this equation that is, just as important if not more important, martha becaus
with prudent spending cuts that show fiscal responsibility. you know, don't forget bill crystal said last week on fox that when taxes were raised in the reagan administration, he didn't say when taxes were raised in the clinton administration. the economy took off. so i think leaders -- >> it's possible. it's definitely possible. >> talk about the spirit of compromise that he had mentioned. what does the president get here out of this in if he gets business leaders on board to get republicans to deal? if he gets them on board, will it force republicans to deal? >> we've seen repeatedly the republicans are seen on their own planetary orbit. if you get wealthy americans to say to them that you have to cut a deal, i think what is really important here is you need to show fiscal responsibility. there's 1 trillion to $2 trillion of gas sitting on the sidelines. and they want to be invested in this country, in growing businesses, in building new equipment. >> does this show us therefore we might be seeing what you just described? release some of the 1.2 trillion dlarz? >> if we can show fiscal respo
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)